Who was present at St. Agatha’s in 2007?

Here’s a list from the minutes of the College of Bishops’ meeting:

PRESENT:

Bishops and Vicars-General:

The Primate, the Most Reverend John Hepworth;

The Chaplain to the Primate, The Reverend Father Richard Talbot;

The Primate Emeritus, The Most Reverend Louis Falk;

The Metropolitan Archbishop of India, The Most Reverend Samuel Prakash,

The Right Reverends Craig Botterill, Louis Campese, David Chislett, Harry Entwistle, Rocco Fiorenza, Juan Garcia, Raphael Kajiwara, James Lall, George Langberg, Michael Gill, Ruben Rodriquez, Robert Mercer, Michael Mjekula, Matthew Ngqono, Tolowa Nona, Samuel Thangaraj Ponniah, Carl Reid, David Robarts, S.J.E. Tutti, Daren Williams, Peter Wilkinson;

The Very Reverend Canons Jeremiah Wellington Ncube Murinda and Ian Woodman;

The Reverend Fathers Brian Gill and Andrew Mukayamba.

 

Secretary to the COB:

Lay Canon Cheryl Woodman.

 

Forward in Faith:

The Right Reverend John Broadhurst;

The Very Reverend Canon Barry Fry.

 

Invited Representatives:

The Right Reverends Michael Wright and Samuel Banzana from the Holy Catholic Church (Anglican Rite).

 

Advisors, Translators and National Representatives:

The Very Reverend Dean Shane Janzen ;

The Very Reverend Canons Zechary Schariah and John Ashish Prakash;

The Reverend Doctor Colin O’Rourke,

The Very Reverend Fathers Anthony Chadwick, Raymond Ball, Ivan Cosby and Waldemar Labusga.

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Who was present at St. Agatha’s in 2007?

  1. Andrew says:

    Debora, Thanks for this series of posts: the Portsmouth postmortem. What are the statistics in the above list? 5 out of 30 so far? What was bishop Prakash’s phrase when berating bishop Hepworth for not entering the Catholic Church now? A shocking lack of integrity.

  2. EPMS says:

    It does not seem fair to include those who have no local Ordinariate to join among the number of the fallen away branches.

    • Continental Catholic says:

      Yes, it would be interesting to see that list sorted down by countries.
      Nevertheless, it seems that Canadian bishops (I count +Mercer as “Canadian”) and also Australian ones (as +Robarts is believed to be on his way to the OLSC Ordinariate and I truly hope that +Hepworth will be ultimately reconciled as well) have been most consistent in their pursuit of unity.

  3. Pete smethers says:

    I’d like a list of bishops in 3 categories; Have joined, haven’t, cannot (i.e. none set up in their country).

    • Rev22:17 says:

      Pete,

      You wrote: I’d like a list of bishops in 3 categories; Have joined, haven’t, cannot (i.e. none set up in their country).

      Before judging those who have not joined, please bear in mind the commitment articulated in Archbishop Hepworth’s pastoral letter that followed the promulgation of Anglicanorum coetibus that the bishops would maintain pastoral ministry and oversight for as long as there was a need for those who, for whatever reason, could not join the ordinariate immediately. At the very least, this commitment indicated a transition whereby some of the bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC) would lead the move to the ordinariate while other bishops of the TAC would bring up the rear. Those who agreed to bring up the rear in good faith acted just as nobly and ethically as those who are in the lead.

      Here, I see a very stark contrast between what transpired in the Anglican Church in America (ACA) here in the United States and what transpired in the Anglican Catholic Church of Canada (ACCC). In both provinces of the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC), the bishops made a conscious decision to split the province into two structures, one going into the ordinariate in the initial wave and remaining in the TAC for as long as necessary. Tragically, that seems to be where the similarity ended. In the ACCC, the separation generally went very smoothly and amicably with the continuing Diocese of Canada and the transitional Pro-Diocese of Our Lady of Walsingham acting honorably and charibably toward the other under the able leadership of then-bishops Peter Wilkinson and Carl Reid and Bishop Craig Botterill. Tragically, in the United States, Bishop Brian Marsh suddenly seized control of the continuing ACA aided and abetted by Bishop Steven Strawn (it’s not at all clear that Bishop Darren Williams was a willing participant in their antics, which may well have, ah, accelerated his decision to retire) and began unleashed a barrage of hateful venom at the transitional Patrimony of the Primate. They also negotiated a pact with another continuing body (the Anglican Province of America), apparently without the consent of either the Primate of the TAC or its House of Bishops. In all probability, the worst mistake that Archbishop John Hepworth made probably was that of not bringing immediate punitive process and their permanent removal from office. In any case, I have high respect for Bishop Craig Botterill and absolutely none for Bishops Brian Marsh and Steven Strawn.

      Elsewhere, it’s very clear that the preponderance of the Anglican Church in Australia (ACA) is moving into the Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of the Southern Cross and the “powers that be” seem to be acting honorably. The situation in India and in South Africa is much more dubious.

      >> In England, Vicar General Grey sent out a rather nasty missive to his clergy while several were in the process of moving to the ordinariate. This conduct is neither respectful nor respectable.

      >> In South Africa, Bishop Michael Gill also seemed to have been agitating for a mutiny within the TAC and maneuvring to bring one about. In retrospect, it seems doubtful that he exercised the leadership to prepare the people of his province to move into an ordinariate in that country — and very likely that the Catholic Church did not agree to set up an ordinariate because the people were not ready for it.

      >> In India, Archbishop Samuel Prakesh also seems not to have prepared his people to move into the Catholic Church. There was no ordinariate offered, but apparently because there was no ordinariate requested. The archbishop did not say much that is in the public record, but he then effected the mutiny in the TAC in March of this year (2012).

      It’s pretty clear that the Indian and South African provinces did have enough members to form an ordinariate, but did not because their bishops did not prepare them. The situation in other places is less clear, as the rest of the TAC is mostly scattered parishes spread across the territory of several episcopal conferences. An ordinariate for these parishes probably is not feasible, but the option of “Anglican Use” parishes within the respective dioceses, at least for now. It’s not at all clear that their bishops acted inappropriately, other than perhaps by their participation in the mutiny — and in that, they likely had reason to belive that there was no other viable option.

      Norm.

  4. I’m flattered about being a Very Reverend. It’s the first I heard of it! 🙂

  5. Luke DeWeese says:

    Thanks, Deborah, for taking my suggestion to post this!

  6. Luke DeWeese says:

    So which of those who were present: A) has already entered the Ordinariate; B) has not yet, but intends to: and, C) probably will not?

  7. DMTG says:

    I’m almost certain that Bishop David Moyer, who was the TAC visitor to England at the time, was present as well (which is cross-checked by this thread: http://www.theanglocatholic.com/2010/01/text-of-the-tac-petition-to-the-holy-see/)

    That said, his situtation doesn’t neatly fall into those three catogories either.

  8. Stephen R Beet says:

    I am surprised that it has not been suggested that those who did not join have strong objections to joining the Church of Rome. Many wish to remain faithful Anglicans and used the Authourised Version and the B ook of Common Prayer. Some of us are not Papists!

    • William Tighe says:

      Well, maybe, but the issue here concerns those who supplicated Rome to make some provision for them – without setting conditions, I might add. To sign such a request, but then to jib because “we didn’t get what we want” seems to demonstrate either a lack of intelligence, or a lack of integrity – or both.

    • Rev22:17 says:

      Stephen,

      You wrote: Many wish to remain faithful Anglicans and used the Authourised Version and the B ook of Common Prayer.

      Isn’t it disingenuous and dishonest for one wishes to remain a “faithful Anglican” to sign a petition for reception of one’s entire communion into the Catholic Church?

      By the way, the term “faithful Anglican” can be taken several ways. One can understand it to mean remaining within the Anglican Communion, but one can also understand it to mean remaining doctrinally orthodox while continuing to worship according to the Anglican variant of the liturgy when one’s own province of the Anglican Communion has adopted practices that are not. It is the latter understanding that has inspired two whole dioceses (the Diocese of Fort Worth and the Diocese of South Carolina) and many intact parishes to leave The Episcopal Church (TEC) here in the States. Where those who leave TEC, and also the Anglican Church in Canada, might land is another issue: some have formed so-called “Continuing Anglican” bodies, some have organized a new province called the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) with the hope of gaining formal recognition of the rest of the Anglican Communion as such, and some have petitioned, and received, a place in the Catholic Church where they can continue to worship as Anglicans.

      Norm.

      • Stephen R Beet says:

        Yes, I agree, it would be dishonest,, and I have never signed such a declaration. I was one of the first to joiin the Continuing Church in the UK after the priestess vote in 1994 but it was soon taken over by Romanists who intended to join that Communion at the first opportunity. At present I am a member of the Church of Ireland (Continuing Rite) and we have no intention of joing Rome..

        Stephen

      • Rev22:17 says:

        Stephen,

        You wrote: Yes, I agree, it would be dishonest,, and I have never signed such a declaration.

        Then nobody here was speaking of your situation. The entire discussion in this thread bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion who did sign such a petition at St. Agatha’s Church in Portsmouth, England, in 2008.

        You wrote: At present I am a member of the Church of Ireland (Continuing Rite) and we have no intention of joing Rome.

        And you have the absolute right to do just that. I hope that it works for you!

        Having said that, you might want to consider observing a mass or two and perhaps evensong in an ordinariate parish when the opportunity presents itself, simply to be informed of what is happening therein.

        Norm.

  9. EPMS says:

    Any particular reason why this subject has been reopened? Commenters on this blog have explored the Potemkin-village nature of the TAC in India, the extent to which peer pressure may have encouraged some signers to stifle their doubts about the implications of their actions, the misinformation which may have been spread about dispensations and other matters,the responsibility which some TAC bishops may have felt towards the significant majority of TAC laypeople who rejected joining the Catholic church. The only questions which remain concern Falk and Hepworth and Mrs Gyapong has rightly discouraged us from speculating idly where no answers are likely to be forthcoming.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s